Sounded to me like the Police are doing their diligence before declaring.MedicMan218 wrote:Probably???She said Eells had a license to carry a firearm and probably would not be charged.
Really????
There should be NO QUESTION!
A.) He should be covered under the Castle Doctrine and
B.) He was wounded too. So, unless he shot himself its an obvious, slam dunk case of pure self defense.
Formalities I suppose but still, they shouldn't even entertain the idea of possibly charging him.
Did the victim provoke the attack in any way?
Did they know each other and this fight carried over from someplace else?
I don't have any problem with "probably" in this case.